Frank Turek explains why those who believe in evolution can't support gay marriage: "If natural selection has a goal of survival, then how could same-sex marriage help with that? Such marriages are an agreement to stay in a sterile and medically unhealthy relationship—the exact antithesis of survival. In fact, if everyone lived faithfully in same-sex marriage, the human race would end quite quickly."

Finally, Bill Keller demands that "NBCUniversal apologize on all of their media properties for mocking and demeaning Christians, as well as giving equal representation for the views of born-again Bible-believing Christians on their programs when they are discussing Biblical sins such as homosexuality, the perversion of Biblical marriage between a man and a woman, and the murder of innocent babies in the womb."

Finally, Fox News contributor Stacey Dash and D-list actor Kevin Sorbo need a half-million dollars so they can make a movie about Meriam Ibrahim: "We know that if Hollywood makes this movie then Meriam’s story will be made completely politically correct, Christianity will be watered down, and Sharia Law will be protected."

Christian apologist and Religious Right anti-gay activist Frank Turek was a guest on the AFA's "Today's Issues"
radio broadcast yesterday, discussing his most recent column where he stated that the fight against gay marriage is a states' rights issue, just like
slavery was during the Civil War.

Turek was advocating for a governor to simply refuse to recognize or enforce any federal court ruling striking down their state's
gay marriage ban, much like how Andrew Jackson refused
to enforce a Supreme Court ruling concerning relations with Native Americans. He predicted that if they were to do so, President
Obama would then send out the National Guard to arrest them, at which point Christians would rally around the governor, resulting in all
of them ending up in jail.

When hosts Tim Wildmon and Ed Vitagliano wondered just where they might find a governor courageous enough to take such a stand, Turek
suggested that South Carolina would be a perfect choice because that state has a history of being willing to fight for states' rights, as
demonstrated by the Civil War.

"It started in South Carolina with the Civil War as you know," Turek
said, "for the same kind of issue: states' rights. Obviously the issue is different. I mean, slavery was different than
obviously this. But, I mean, it was a states' rights issue":

Frank Turek says the push for marriage equality is "stealing rights from God."

Finally, Stu Burguiere claims that we intentionally misrepresented Glenn Beck's recent comments about Hillary Clinton because we "hate Glenn," even though we fully explained the context in the post in which the video was used. But if Burguiere is genuinely concerned about people taking things out of context, he ought to discuss that with his boss.

Religious Right activist Frank Turek claimed yesterday that Thomas Jefferson would lead a second American Revolution against the teaching of evolution.

In an interview on Washington Watch, Turek told the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins that by proscribing Creationism, public schools have effectively declared “that the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional.”

“If [Jefferson] were to come back to America today and find that his tax dollars were going to pay public school teachers to teach his school children that his Declaration of Independence was unconstitutional, I think he’d start the Second American Revolution,” Turek insisted.

Perkins agreed: “I think you’re right.”

Turek: If these bureaucrats are going to say that we can’t mention Creation anywhere in school, I ask them this question: Are you telling me that the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional? Because the Declaration of Independence talks about our Creator, it says we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, it says that we were created. Please don’t tell me the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional. I think I know what Thomas Jefferson would do, the man who said that taxation without representation is tyranny, if he were to come back to America today and find that his tax dollars were going to pay public school teachers to teach his school children that his Declaration of Independence was unconstitutional, I think he’d start the Second American Revolution.

Often lost in the debate over marriage equality is the fact that many of its leading opponents aren’t just interested in keeping the status quo on marriage. Instead, they're seeking to reverse what they see as a decline that began with laws granting greater freedom to women within marriages – specifically, the right to no-fault divorce.

In a conversation with radio host Janet Mefferd Friday, anti-gay writer Frank Turek responded to marriage equality supporters who point to divorce rates among straight couples. “You don’t make the car better by slashing another tire on it,” he said. “ You go back and repair the first tire. And I’m the first one to say that the bigger problem right now is no-fault divorce.”

Turek: I would agree with them that heterosexuals have debased it, heterosexuals have slashed one of the tires of marriage. But that’s not an argument for slashing another tire.

Mefferd: Good point, good point.

Turek: You don’t make the car better by slashing another tire on it. You go back and repair the first tire. And I’m the first one to say that the bigger problem right now is no-fault divorce.

Mefferd: Ah, yes.

Turek: But that is not an argument for same-sex marriage, in fact it’s an argument against it. Why? Because it shows you that when you liberalize marriage laws, you actually have a negative effect on society, which is what the no-fault marriage laws have done. So if you’re going to make marriage even more liberal, if you’re going to even further tear down the definition of marriage and make it totally genderless now, you’re going to have even worse results. You’re going to have even more illegitimacy, more kids that aren’t taken care of.

Now, I know the same-sex marriage advocates are going to say, ‘What, so same-sex marriage is going to do to your marriage?’ Well, it’s not going to do anything to my personal marriage, but it’s going to debase the institution of marriage into the future, make it a genderless institution, and that will hurt children and hurt the whole country.

The ferventlyanti-gaywriter Frank Turek takes to Townhall today to present an interesting analogy. Turke argues that when gays and lesbians advocate for marriage equality, they are being just as unreasonable as someone who “can’t qualify to become a police officer” protesting “when the government pays other people to be police officers.” He goes on to say that gays and lesbians can “simply marry someone of the opposite sex” and that the legalization of same-sex marriage will harm children and cause Americans to “lose the freedom of speech.”

First, everyone has the same equal right to marry a qualified person of the opposite sex. That law treats every man and woman equally, but not every behavior they may desire equally. Same sex marriage and natural marriage are different behaviors with different outcomes, so the law rightfully treats them differently. One behavior perpetuates and stabilizes society, and the other doesn’t. Promoting one behavior does not deny rights to people who don’t engage in that behavior.

An analogy may help clarify this point. Like marriage, the government promotes police work by paying people to become police officers because police do much good for society. But if you can’t qualify to become a police officer, or if you choose another vocation, your rights are not being violated when the government pays other people to be police officers. All people, regardless of their vocation, experience the benefits of police, just like all people, regardless of their marriage status, experience the benefits of natural marriage.

…

Some will ignore those biological realities and object, “But men and women are the same so there’s no difference between homosexual and heterosexual relationships!” If that were true, no one would be arguing for same-sex marriage. The very fact people demand same-sex marriage is precisely because they know men and women are drastically different. If men and women were the same, no one would be spending time and energy trying to get same-sex marriage approved. They would simply marry someone of the opposite sex—which according to them is the same as someone of the same sex—and be done with it.

…

Now, I am not suggesting that a law would fully achieve either, but only to point out that natural and same-sex marriage should not be legally or culturally equated. The truth is homosexual and heterosexual relationships are not the same, can never be the same, and will never yield the same benefits to individuals or society. We hurt everyone, especially children, by pretending otherwise.

Finally, as jurisdictions with same-sex marriage show us, people lose their freedoms of speech, association, religion and even parenting due to the imposition of same-sex marriage. In Massachusetts, for example, parents now have no right to even know when their kids as young as kindergarten are being taught about homosexuality, much less opt out of it; business owners must now provide benefits to same-sex couples, and they can be fined for declining to provide services at homosexual weddings; Catholic charities were forced to close and leave Massachusetts and Washington D.C. because both governments mandated that all adoption agencies had to provide children to homosexuals. So much for freedom of religion! And in Canada, same-sex marriage has led to such a chilling restriction on speech, that my speech here today could get me fined or jailed if given there.

To sum up, the government already permits homosexual relationships, but promoting them by equating them with married heterosexual relationships ignores the facts of nature, the needs of children and the health of society. While people with different sexual attractions are equal, not all behaviors are equally beneficial. True equality treats equal behaviors equally. It doesn’t demand that different behaviors be treated the same.

While appearing on AFR Mornings with host Frank Turek on the American Family Association’s American Family Radio, anti-gay activist Michael Brown said that gay rights advocates are making LGBT youth who commit suicide “pawns in a larger political agenda” because they know “it’s a whole lot harder” for their opponents “to look at a kid and a family where there’s a suicide.” Brown, who blamed gay rights supporters for the murder of California fifteen year-old Lawrence King, told Turek that increased attention to suicides by LGBT teenagers are making people ignore other teenagers who commit suicide.

Of course, Brown offered no evidence to back up his claim that concerns about suicide among LGBT youth are undercutting efforts to prevent suicide in general. The Suicide Prevention Resource Center reported in 2008 that lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth “are nearly one and a half to three times more likely to have reported suicidal ideation” and “nearly one and a half to seven times more likely than non-LGB youth to have reported attempting suicide,” noting that “stigma and discrimination are directly tied to risk factors for suicide.”

Later, Brown called gay rights advocates “completely intolerant” and Turek, who has called homosexuality a “road to destruction,” labeled them “the most intolerant people out there.”

Brown: For every one kid, gay teen, that commits suicide because of bullying or because parents say ‘homosexuals go to hell’ or because they just feel ‘I have no future, I have no hope, I can never marry’ and so on, these should be weighty issues to us as Christians, this should hurt us, what if it’s our own kid? That’s why we need to look at every kid. But for every one that commits suicide for that cause, there are--is it dozens, is it scores, I don’t know the exact stats how it breaks down--but a whole lot more kids who commit suicide for other reasons, we never hear about them in the news! We don’t hear national campaigns about them!

So for me what is so concerning is these kids become pawns in a larger political agenda because it’s a whole lot harder to look at a kid and a family where there’s a suicide, it’s a whole lot harder to look at that and hold to our convictions than it is to look at say two forty year old men that want to be married. So we need a compassionate response but boy is this being utilized to push a whole agenda on our society and then an agenda that is completely intolerant, you cannot hold to your views.

Turek: The folks who say they are fighting for tolerance are the most intolerant people out there.